Carrying on the Exclamation dot tax regime debate so not lost in earlier posting

Vintage Rolex Discussion

Carrying on the Exclamation dot tax regime debate so not lost in earlier posting

fatboyharris
VRF Member
Joined: July 9th, 2004, 2:59 pm

February 15th, 2012, 1:15 pm #1

Last edited by fatboyharris on February 15th, 2012, 3:22 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Quote
Like
Share

Joined: October 13th, 2003, 5:24 pm

February 15th, 2012, 2:23 pm #2

... Identify it as a symbol without taking away from the dial appearance.


I agree that majority of the lum dots are 100% original to the dial..I own a few myself and have analized them till my eyes hurt.

But, in my opinion...as a watchmaker, I have worked on a handful of watches with lum dot dials which appeared to be added on having a slightly different lum color and being applied off center form the bottom hash mark ...but now with this "import or export tax' concept or theory it might explain as to hastily added lum dot was exercised for this purpose.
All it takes is dab of lum paint on the dial and you have a symbol. Even Rolex service centers in that respected country could have administered this task.

One other notion which I cannot prove is..maybe the underline dial was an import symbol for Europe. I have NO evidence of this..just a thought.

Intriguing concept.

Arthur
Last edited by aakviper on February 15th, 2012, 2:26 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Quote
Like
Share

Joined: May 7th, 2006, 5:02 pm

February 15th, 2012, 3:09 pm #3

Here is the question I have, which was raised by Roger's post below re: the Ex Point being an indicator of export to Canada:

When Rolex exported their materials to North America for assembly and sale, did they do separate shipments to the US & Canada or was the NA market treated as a whole, with all watches destined for New York first and then shipped up to Toronto from the US?

If someone knows the answer to that, it might help narrow things down a bit.
Best,
T.

Quote
Like
Share

fadaman
VRF Member
fadaman
VRF Member
Joined: September 12th, 2007, 2:55 pm

February 15th, 2012, 4:33 pm #4

My experience with vintage Rolexes originally purchased here in Toronto that had complete box sets is that the boxes were of the same type and style as those I've seen in the UK and Australia. I have not analyzed bands of the same period, but would not be surprised to see a "commonwealth" trend for Canadian distributed Rolexes.

I would find it surprising if Toronto shipments were routed through the US, specifically where there is a long and documented history of Canadian market rolexes that suggest a unique and dedicated distribution relationship with Canada.

But I could be wrong, it has happened once or twice before
Quote
Like
Share

Joined: October 13th, 2003, 5:24 pm

February 15th, 2012, 4:37 pm #5

Here is the question I have, which was raised by Roger's post below re: the Ex Point being an indicator of export to Canada:

When Rolex exported their materials to North America for assembly and sale, did they do separate shipments to the US & Canada or was the NA market treated as a whole, with all watches destined for New York first and then shipped up to Toronto from the US?

If someone knows the answer to that, it might help narrow things down a bit.
Best,
T.
if we include the USA, Canada, it seems plausible that South America can also be part of the market as well. I have no proof but just a thought..

Arthur
Quote
Like
Share

Joined: May 7th, 2006, 5:02 pm

February 15th, 2012, 5:06 pm #6

Here is the question I have, which was raised by Roger's post below re: the Ex Point being an indicator of export to Canada:

When Rolex exported their materials to North America for assembly and sale, did they do separate shipments to the US & Canada or was the NA market treated as a whole, with all watches destined for New York first and then shipped up to Toronto from the US?

If someone knows the answer to that, it might help narrow things down a bit.
Best,
T.
Now whether it went across the border a few times in 50 some odd years, who the hell knows?





Best,
T.

Quote
Like
Share

fatboyharris
VRF Member
Joined: July 9th, 2004, 2:59 pm

February 15th, 2012, 5:26 pm #7


at that time 26 compared with 17 for USA?

regards

John
Last edited by fatboyharris on February 15th, 2012, 5:33 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Quote
Like
Share

pulutsantan
pulutsantan

February 15th, 2012, 5:44 pm #8

Rubies count on the other hand was probably marked
to identify which tax rate to use imposed by USA customs only.

For Canada the tax although high at the time may be not determined by the Rubies count.

2 cents worth.







Quote
Share

Joined: May 7th, 2006, 5:02 pm

February 15th, 2012, 5:47 pm #9

at that time 26 compared with 17 for USA?

regards

John
...like 5513, 5500, etc.
That's why you will see varieties of jewel count (17 vs. 25/26) in, say, 5513s of this era based on market but not 5512 or 1675 or 160x/180x for that matter.
Best,
T.


Last edited by tomvox1 on February 15th, 2012, 5:55 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Quote
Like
Share

Joined: October 13th, 2003, 5:24 pm

February 15th, 2012, 6:03 pm #10

A
Quote
Like
Share